As we have seen for good or for bad, social media has given everyone a platform and a voice to express their opinions. We’ve also seen recently how social media companies have blocked, removed, or even banned celebrities, politicians, and other public figures from their platforms.
However, as discussed in a recent article for the ABA Journal, a Florida law banning social media censorship is deemed to be unconstitutional. A federal appeals court has blocked parts of the Florida law that prevents companies from banning political candidates, deprioritizing political message or censoring content by journalist enterprises.
Florida lawyers had stated that the state had made an allowable decision to treat social media companies like common carriers that have to provide a right to access for some types of speech. It seems like the appellate court has a different view on the subject as they deem social media companies to be protected by the First Amendment, and the law interferes with their right to exercise editorial discretion.
This appellate court fuels an interesting and ongoing debate as to where social media companies stand in allowing its users to voice their thoughts, opinions, beliefs, etc. There have been other state laws across the country that have had the same controversy surrounding its legislation.
Social media has proven to be one of the best ways to reach and influence large groups of people. Many individuals now get their news only from social media sites so what they see on these platforms is what they believe and speak about, which helps explain why the people and content on these sites can always stir up controversy.
ความคิดเห็น